municipal broadband

[Mr.Hospitality]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Maybe you could explain your last statement, which you've supported with nothing. In fact, if anything, your first statement is more of an argument *for* government getting involved in this (as they have with phone service), because otherwise people in sparsely populated areas are out of luck.

Texas doesn't mention wireless. And you completely ignore it. It is now much cheaper to implement wireless infrastructure.

[509]

Originally Posted by TexasLawyer2000

The irony... to see republicans for big government and see the democrats be conservative.

You know, the Seattle media just ignored that part of the issue.

I thought it was hilarious...it really shows that the political parties really have no BELIEFS it is all about maintaining power!!

BTW....I lived in Berkeley for almost a decade with all the pretend socialists. Lots of talk, but very, very little action.

Now I live in eastern Washington. Lots of talks about "conservative" talk and they always electe Republicans.

However, I get my electricity, water, sewer, internet, phone and cable TV service from the county. The local medical services are basically a physicians co-operative. The fruit growers formed co-operatives to market their fruit. And on and on it goes.....

When I lived in Berkeley I always wondered what it would be to live in a "socialist" community. I never thought it would be run by Republicans!!!

In all fairness, they do a pretty good job of running a socialist economy.